Entertainment

Google and Their Zany Terms of Service

Over the last year or so, I've been following the horrible inconsistencies in the enforcement of Google's various TOS policies. The Inquisitr touched on one earlier today when they reported on Google's collusion with Indian authorities on the creation of their Orkut censorship policy. Everyone who has ever put together a weekend project that turned into something with a community or a userbase knows that the terms of service is probably the most ridiculously boring part of the work, and is always going to end up being the source of a headache down the line.

When you're a multi-billion dollar company like Google, though, it's incumbant upon you to put a bit of thought as to what your general moral and ethical stance is going to be, and how you're going to handle the tangled web of international regulation.

Why should Google be held to a higher standard than the rest of the sea of startups? Because as goes Google, so go we all. I touched on this in what is the epitome of what I'm talking about in an article did earlier this month. The article chronicled the bookend to what has been Google and YouTube's support of middle eastern terrorists' right to broadcast on YouTube in response to pressure applied by US Senator Joe Lieberman.

Essentially, the move was a right one because it deftly avoided the creation of highly restrictive legislation in the United States that would have undoubtedly led to undesirable unintended consequences. As I pointed out then, though, Google has a history of playing chicken with the law as an alternative to coming up with a coherent moral code:

Generally, the only thing that seems to influence Google to do the right thing in the past has been a combination of media and government pressure. The most prime example of this which springs to mind is the case of Orkut and the literal infiltration of pedophiles onto the system. The story stayed on our radar for quite some time, starting with reports in January of 2007 as noted by Pete, the problem continuing to grow on into September when Google decided to do something about policing their community.

Google continued to protect the identities of pedophiles from Brazilian authorities for months, as noted by Sean in October and myself in April of this year. Finally, in late April, Google finally caved to widespread media criticism and governmental authority and began cooperating with police in turning over the identities of those trafficking in pictures and video of under-aged sex acts.

Similarly, the moral and ethical inconsistencies Google's exhibited with YouTube have been well documented here at this blog. Aside from the terrorists (who up to a few weeks ago remained uncensored while their detractors were routinely silenced):

Handsome Hong Kong Guy Censored for showing videos of clothed local females with derogatory towards women music in the background.This Pornography Advertisement Uncensored. It doesn’t show actual full nudity or sex acts, but you definitely get the idea.A Breast-Feeding Mother Censored over obscenity claims.This Strip Tease Censored. A small area over the genitals remains covered for the duration of the minute and a half long strip tease. This video was removed the day after our editorial went live on the site. There are still hundreds more like it on the site, however.An Egyptian Fellow Censored (then uncensored) for showing video evidence of local police brutality.This GTA IV Ad Uncensored, despite depicting a police officer firing a gun into a crowd of civilians.

What's going on now is that instead of working to come up with a cohesive company-wide policy or ethos, they're playing to the law, which is certain to lead to only more pitfalls and unintended consequences down the line. Duncan documents the program they've created to keep their Googley butts out of Indian courts:

Google’s activities in India previously drew international headlines when Google provided local police information leading to the arrest of Rahul Krishnakumar Vaid for posting to an Orkut group named “I hate Sonia Ghandi.”

The new initiative sees Google training “cyber police” in most “tier 1 and 2″ cities in India, and offering police a “priority reporting tool” that sees any objectionable content flagged by police being reviewed faster than standard objection flags.

The elephant in the room is the fact that all of this comes from a company whose motto is supposedly "Don't Be Evil." It seems to have metamorphosed into "Let's Not Get Fined, Raided or Shut Down." I'm all for protecting your business interests, but Google is operating from an unprecedented position of power, and like that child deity from Classic Star Trek, they don't know how to properly weild that power yet.

We're watching, though, Google. We all want to love you whole-heartedly, but when you do stuff like this, you make us worry that you're traveling down a dark path. You've built up an incredible trust with your users over the years. We implore you: don't destroy that trust.

Mashable
is a global, multi-platform media and entertainment company. Powered by its own proprietary technology, Mashable is the go-to source for tech, digital culture and entertainment content for its dedicated and influential audience around the globe.